[Mr. Singleton-Salmon] I was very pleased to hear the hon. Parliamentary Secretary's definition of a "rotary merchandiser". I thought it meant merchants in the Rotary Club! Mr. Leslie Goonewardene: I have just one observation to make. What would the position be if an enterprising local manufacturer manufactured all these instruments? Then too, are they going to be banned? The Hon. S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike: He would be encouraging local production! Mr. Samaraweera: Regarding the first observation, that is, the objection to this Order being applied to the punching ball, may I say that it does not depend only on the strength of the individual manipulating it. Bets are placed while the game is in operation. It is a slot machine. Dr. Perera: You mean this is operated on a slot machine? Mr. Samaraweera : Yes. The punching ball is operated on a slot machine. The definition clearly explains the position. Dr. Perera: It is not a ball which players punch? Mr. Samaraweera: No. It is not that. Dr. Perera Then it is all right. EXPLOSIVES ACT: Mr. Samaraweera: I move, "That the Regulations made by the Minister of Home Affairs under Section 33 of the Explosives Act, No. 21 of 1956, and published in the Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 11,125 of June 3, 1957, which were presented on June 17, 1957, be approved." The Bill sought to control and enable the prohibition, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase, use and transport of any explosive. The Bill was passed and under section 33 the Minister was given the power to make regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the principles of that Act. It is under section 33 that these regulations are made. Copies of regulations have been issued to hon. Members. Question put, and agreed to. CEYLON DEVELOPMENT LOANS The following item stood next upon the Order Paper : "The Minister of Finance-Ceylon Development Loans-That this House hereby resolves that each sum of money specified in column II of the Schedule hereto, which was expended out of the Consolidated Fund of Ceylon during the financial year ending on September 30, 1953, for work specified in the corresponding entry in column I of that Schedule, being work connected with or incidental to the development of Ceylon, shall be replaced out of the moneys raised by way of loan under sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Ceylon Development Loans Act, No. 6 of 1954. 66 4. Alteration to "Travel Lodge office and staff quarters in Canberra and additions and alterations to Fayrewether", Residence of the High Commissioner for Ceylon in Australia 1,563,581 12 11,707,570 28 34 88 120,997 34 5. Loan to Electrical Undertakings for new electrical extensions and capital 6,250,735 67 6. Loan to Electrical Undertakings for completion of works on Stage I of the Hydro-Electric Scheme 1,996,421 56 7. Loan to Electrical Undertakings for Section A of Stage II of the HydroElectric Scheme 8. Loan to Railway for renewal and capital works 420,555 37 13,846,731 76 12. Capital expenditure for establishing a state-owned distillery 13. Quarters and offices for Divisional Revenue Officers (Stage I) .. 64,816 26 17. Government Quarters, Hambantota (1 type No. 9, 2 type No. 7, and 7 type No. 6) .. 18. Borstal Expansion Scheme (3rd Stage) 2,353 4 59,286 86 19. Quarters for Divisional Revenue Officers' Clerks 60,008 53 20. Government Clerks' Quarters, Kurunegala 128,979 36 21. Three junior staff quarters, 10 senior clerks' and 20 junior clerks' quarters 28. Construction of Juvenile Court, Colombo 29. Purchase and erection of a pre-fabricated steel building at Ratmalana, Western Province 31. Jaffna Peninsula Lagoon Scheme, Northern Province 30. Elahera-Minneri Yodi-ela Scheme, Second Stage, Central Province 32. Purchase of mechanical plant for use on irrigation schemes 33. Lifting gates to Verugal Anicut, Allai Scheme, Eastern Province 34. Restoration of Balagalla Tank, Divulane Scheme, Eastern Province 2,942 46 25,081 60 3,650 0 125,388 98 8,531 34 39,241 99 115,905 56 5,213,382 89 35. Construction of Maha Amuna Anicut and channels, Attanagalla-oya Scheme 36. Colombo South Drainage and Reclamation Scheme, Stage II 1,347 44 79,109 83 220 0 31,992 25 37. Mi Oya Diversion Scheme 38. Gal oya Reservoir Scheme 39. Minneriya Augmentation Scheme 40. Restoration of Huruluwewa Tank 41. Nalanda Oya Reservoir Scheme 42. Iranamadu Scheme 43. Strengthening and improving the Kelani-ganga Flood Protection Scheme 44. Kantalai Augmentation Scheme 45. Reconditioning of Minneri-yodi-ela 46. Allai Extension Scheme .. 47. Providing irrigation facilities for lands under left bank and right bank of Unichchai Scheme 48. Construction of Gin-ganga Flood Protection Scheme 49. Muruthawela anicut and channels, Attanagalla Oya Scheme 50. Panugala anicut and channels, Attanagalla Oya Scheme .. 418,332 61 842,611 33 235,517 44 1,140,542 33 456,158 18 181,473 25 66,681 61 2,839,268 81 42,699 26 2,237,089 79 113,893 57 409,070 1 337,276 2 215,613 69 51. Kinigama anicut and channels, Attanagalla Oya Scheme .. 235,329 46 52. Distribution system under the inlet channel, Ridibendi Ela Scheme 31,538 18 157,824 49 Scheme 232,200 70 55. Improvements to Dumbutuluwewa and Topawewa bunds 56. Irrigation and access facilities to 10,000 acres under Huruluwewa Scheme 57. Elahera Extersion Scheme 58. Regrading, metalling and tarring the main Yodi Ela bund from ( miles to 59. Restoration of Kandalama Tank including provision of irrigation facilities.. .. 62. Improvements to Lemasooriyagama Ela, Nuwara Eliya District 63. Restoration of Periyamadu Tank including provision of irrigation facilities 64. Restoration of Periya Pandivirichan Kulam including provision of irrigation facilities 65. Restoration of Mapakadawewa including provision of irrigation facilities 66. Restoration of Kotiyagala Mahawewa including provision of irrigation facilities 67. Elephant Pass Lagoon Scheme, Jaffna District 68. Kimbulwana Oya Reservoir Scheme, N.W.P. 89,650 60 .. 69. Restoration of Diulwewa Tank including provision of irrigation facilities, N.C.P. 70. Construction of Padawiya Road, N.C. P. 71. Handapanegalawewa Scheme, Uva 72. Land Development 56,541 61 246,022 43 47,612 83 23,872,794 74 73. Grant to Gal Oya Development Board .. .. 20,432,451 66 8,025,728 12 74. Acquisition of lands 75. Giritale Augmentation Scheme, N. C. P. 76. Restoration of Badgiriya Tank including provision of irrigation facilities.. 77. Provision of irrigation facilities for 5,000 acres under Iranamadu Tank, Karachchi Scheme Total amount 352,972 45 1,619 24 496,132 64 113,709,953 90" 2.31 P.M. refuge behind the hon. Leader of the himself who was a member of the Public Accounts Committee. Dr. Perera: No, no. Mr. T. B. Subasinghe (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Defence and External Affairs): He was never a member of the Public Accounts Committee. The Hon. Stanley de Zoysa (Min- Opposition ister of Finance): I move the Motion standing in my name. Hon. Members might recall that this Motion was introduced during the last Session of this Parliament and during the course of the Debate, the hon. Leader of the Opposition raised certain questions and, although the answers came somewhat readily to me, I felt that in fairness to the House and to the hon. Member I should examine these answers carefully before stating them on the Floor of the House. Consequently, the Debate was adjourned and therefore this matter comes up for the second time. I rather heard the hon. Leader of the Opposition saying, “Ah, ah” and smacking his lips for the kill. But I must tell him that really there is nothing so sinister in this. I take The Hon. Stanley de Zoysa: I beg your pardon. You have so often mentioned it that I thought you were. The position really is this. The hon. Leader of the Opposition referred to certain discrepancies in the figures set out in the Estimates as against the figures revealed in this Schedule. The real reason is this. These discrepancies are due to the fact that expenditure on some of these items has been increased by transferring, through virement procedure, to these items savings from other items. This is permitted by Financial Regulations as the hon. Member knows. The Auditor-General in his report on the Accounts for the financial year 1954 published as Parliamentary Series No. 16 referred to all those increases in Schedule A. The Standing Committee on Public Accounts went into it and this is what they say: "Your Committee having examined the accounting officers in respect of whose Votes these excesses have been incurred see no reason for their being disallowed by parliament. ... And on that Report, Parliament allowed these things. I hope the hon. Member is satisfied that there was no intention to deceive the House or in any other way to expend moneys in a manner not approved by Parliament. The hon. Member will appreciate, I trust, that I am as vigilant on these matters as the hon. Member himself would be. Question proposed. 2.34 P.M. Mr. Singleton-Salmon: The Hon. Minister has explained why some of these figures differ from what we had originally passed, but so far as I remember there were some questions asked at that time as to some of the individual items-not only as to why they should exceed what this House has orginally passed, but as to why they were in Loan Fund Expenditure at all. Dr. Perera: That is right. Mr. Singleton-Salmon: I cannot remember the actual questions. But each time that this House is asked to transfer moneys from the Consolidated Fund to the Loan Fund, always the question raised is should it be Loan Funds or should it be Revenue Expenditure? For instance, there is this item: "Lifting gates to Verugal Anicut, Rs. 1,347.44". There were some items brought up at that time. The Hon. Stanley de Zoysa: I have got a note of them. 2.36 P.M. Dr. Perera: This certainly raises certain important questions of financial procedure. I raised on the last occasion even the legal question whether it is possible for us to transfer moneys in this way once Parliament has already voted a specified sum without another specific decision from Parliament making that change before the transfer takes place. All those are legal questions which I am not going to enter into now. I hope at least the Hon. Minister of Finance will agree with me that this whole procedure is thoroughly wrong and incorrect from the point of view of strict accounting. The whole procedure needs to be re-examined. I will raise this question once again during the Budget Debate when we consider this question, If you go back to the accounts of 1953 and the Debates of 1953 you will find that there was considerable criticism about the inclusion of items in the normal Budget when they should have been put under Loan Funds and the inclusion of some items under Loan Funds which should have been put into the normal Budget. All these complications lead to considerable distortion of the exact financial picture prevailing at any point of time. It was for that reason that I raised this question on the last occasion. I wish to raise the matter again during the Budget Debate and I do not want to start a long discussion now. But I would like to tell the Hon. Minister of Finance that in the interests of this country as a whole, quite apart from whether it is the Government or ourselves, this matter should be considered impartially and put on a proper basis so that the country can have a correct picture at any particular time of the financial situation of the country instead of having this jugglery all this time. It completely distorts the picture. You have got a completely different picture of the finances of 1953-54. The matter might be considered from that point of view. For the moment I do not want to press The Hon. Stanley de Zoysa: I will agree that I accept a great deal of what the hon. Member says. This is a practice that has gone on for several years in the past and the time has come for us to examine these practices and to review them. I agree with a good deal of what the hon. Member said. There is a committee which I have appointed and which is inquiring into these practices with a view to adopting a system of accounting which would be more realistic. Question put, and agreed to. to enable the Central Government to undertake this responsibility in the case of those village committees whose funds are meagre. Money is available from savings, but we want the principle to be approved by the House. Question proposed. 2.41 P.M. Dr. Perera : I think what the Hon. Minister contemplates is quite correct. There are very small local authorities that cannot maintain these water schemes. But the Hon. Minister must satisfy himself that even those who have the necessary resources will not pass on the buck to him. The second point is, once this is done, would the Central Government levy a water rate in order to recover part of the expenses involved? Of course, in some cases it may be possible to do this and in other cases it may not be possible. But this question must be decided because, where a local authority itself inaugurates and maintains a water service, it does levy a water rate to recover the expenditure. There is no reason why the Central Government should be deprived of this revenue if it undertakes the responsibility. 2.43 P.M. Mr. E. P. Samarakkody (Dehiowita): There is another aspect that I wish to deal with. Certainly it is desirable that the Central Government should come to the assistance of those local bodies which find it difficult to maintain these schemes. The question is whether the Central Government should step in and take charge of these rural water supply schemes altogether or whether it should only bear the maintenance expenditure. If the case of the Minister is that village committees are unable to find the necessary money to maintain these schemes, I would ask why it is not possible for the Central Government to give a grant to village committees for this purpose. This is a matter that touches the fundamentals of local government, because |